David Little goes to jail

Yesterday David Little was sentenced to 66 days in jail for failure to file his Canadian income taxes.

Please see this blog post for some background. Better yet, visit David's website for details.

David Little: Appeal denied

Have been dilatory in making this blog report: On Jan. 14, 2010, the Supreme Court of Canada announced, with no explanation, that it would not hear David Little's appeal with regard to tax funding for abortion. This is a setback, but David is not about to be silenced.

Please see this blog post for some background. Better yet, visit David's website for details.

David Little: Application for Appeal

As noted almost 2 months ago, David Little lost his New Brunswick appeal case, and was preparing to try to appeal to the Canadian Supreme Court. That possibility is becoming nearer.

As a friend of David, I have been privileged to see a copy of his "Application for Leave to Appeal" to the Supreme Court, and can tell you I am quite impressed. David finally has a good lawyer working with him on this important case, and this document shows that.

One of the points made in this application, and which has not been made heretofore, is the distinction between freedom of religion and freedom of conscience. Prior decisions have muddled this distinction, stupidly observing that Mr. Little's freedom of religion was not being denied by taxpayer funding for abortion. Evidently, what was meant was that David was still free to go to church on Sunday and pray to God, just so long as he didn't let his religious beliefs get in the way of his civic duty to fund the slaughter.

OK, says the present argument, perhaps Mr. Little's freedom of religion has not been explicitly denied. But his freedom of conscience has been trampled upon, and that, too, is a violation of human rights. Now, I'm not sure that this distinction should be pivotal. Last time I checked, religion and conscience were pretty solidly connected. But then again, I'm no lawyer.

What really grabbed my attention in this document was the argument that I have to believe is the pivotal legal argument: the primacy of natural law over positive law. A statement in the document says this:

As a matter of academic jurisprudence, the practical application of the founding principles means that positive law (such as legislation permitting the killing of innocent human beings) must yield to natural law (which stands on a higher law that forbids the legal killing of innocent human beings) in circumstances where there is a conflict.

In my opinion, it's high time this principle was invoked in a court of law, and I am delighted to finally see a lawyer who is willing to make this point.

I would love to learn from a lawyer if what I have heard is true: Didn't natural law used to be taught in law school as the basis for all human law?

Well, anyway, that's the news from the Canadian front. Stay tuned. And please keep David, his family, and this important case in your prayers.

New Brunswick decision

On April 29, David Little appeared before the New Brunswick Court of Appeal (roughly equivalent to a State Supreme Court in the U.S.) for the latest chapter in his legal case to establish that tax-funded abortion violates one's right of conscience and therefore one's freedom of religion. For more details on this important case, read David's own summary account here.

On August 20, the three-judge panel rendered their judgment against David, and has recommended that he be denied the right to appeal. The opinion, written by The Honourable Mr. Justice Joseph T. Robertson, an alleged Catholic, can be read (in PDF format) here.

David has repeatedly vowed that he will go to jail rather than obey the unjust human authorities in this matter. He has one more opportunity before fulfilling that vow, and is now preparing an appeal to the Canadian Supreme Court.